▾

External sources (not reviewed)

[...] [...] design of the Mughrabi Ascent [to] be inclusive of all parties concerned and for the Israeli authorities [to] continue the cooperation commenced with all concerned parties, in particular with Jordanian and Waqf experts; its call on the DirectorGeneral to organize a follow-up meeting of experts as soon as possible, once the parties concerned have reached an agreement and its decision to continue applying the Reinforced Monitoring Mechanism for the state of conservation of the Mughrabi Ascent.

[...] [...] Waqf experts, most notably, in order to take the necessary measurements for the concept design proposed by Jordan, as evaluated by ICOMOS and ICCROM; and enable Jordan as a concerned party to present its final design for the restoration and preservation ofthe Mughrabi Ascent”.

Marcela Tobón Yagarí, representing the Embera Chamí in Colombia, addresses participants at the panel on indigenous youth initiatives, held at UNICEF House in New York.

As a follow-up to 176 EX/Special Plenary Meeting/Decision and to the decisions of the World Heritage Committee at its 31st, 32nd and 33rd sessions in 2007, 2008 and 2009 respectively, which requested the World Heritage Centre to facilitate the exchanges between Israeli, Jordanian and Waqf experts to discuss the detailed proposals for the design of theMughrabi ascent; two professional meetings took place in Jerusalem on 13 January and 24 February 2008 between Israeli and Jordanian (including Waqf) experts.

As regards the Mughrabi ascent, while [...][...]

[...] [...] meeting atthe Mughrabi sitewith all [...]

[...] [...] measurements of the Mughrabi Ascent Site, [...][...]

Since the drafting of the document 186 EX/5, new information related to the Mughrabi Ascent in the Old City of Jerusalem was received by the Secretariat.

[...] [...] America and the Caribbean, held in Santiago from 3 to 7 October; the Thirty-fifth Meeting of Heads of National Drug Law Enforcement Agencies, Asia and the Pacific, held in Agra, India, from 22 [...][...]

[...] [...] the design of the Mughrabi Ascent [to] [...][...]

[...] [...] especiallyafterRabbi Agiba,at the beginning of the second century, had divested the study of the law of its previous Midrash character [...][...]

As a follow-up to 176 EX/Special Plenary Meeting/Decision and to the decisions of the World Heritage Committee since its 31st session in 2007, which requested the World Heritage Centre to facilitate the exchanges between Israeli, Jordanian and Waqf experts to discuss the detailed proposals for the design of the Mughrabi ascent, two professional meetings took place in Jerusalem on 13 January and 24 February 2008 between Israeli and Jordanian (including Waqf) experts.

The duty of Israel to cooperate with Jordanian authorities regarding the Mughrabi Ascent issue is imperative under international humanitarian law, including the relevant provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 and the Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict of 1954, both recalled in World Heritage Committee decision 33 COM 7A.18 and UNESCO Executive Board decision 182 EX/5 Add.4.

The Reinforced Monitoring Mechanism, requested by the Executive Board at its 176th session (176 EX/Special Plenary Meeting Decision) and by the World Heritage Committee at its 31st session in 2007, is being applied to the Old City of Jerusalem with regard to theMughrabi ascent.

At the Committee’s 8th meeting, on 12 August, Ms. Zulficar introduced draft text A/HRC/AC/7/L.4, sponsored by Mr. José Antonio Bengoa Cabello, Ms. Laurence Boisson de Chazournes, Mr. Shiqiu Chen, Ms. Chisung Chung, Mr. Wolfgang Heinz, Mr. Alfred Ntunduguru Karokora, Mr. Vladimir Kartashkin, Mr. Obiora Chinedu Okafor, Ms. Anantonia Reyes Prado, Mr. Shigeki Sakamoto, Mr. Dheerujlall Seetulsingh, Mr. AhmerBilal Soofi, Ms. Halima Embarek Warzazi and Ms. Mona Zulficar.

It reiterates the intention by the Jordanian authorities to “submit and implement a design for the Mughrabi Gate Pathway to the World Heritage Centre, which maintains the integrity, authenticity and cultural heritage”.

[...] [...] could be maximised with a fee of US$ 47(2001 prices) whereasthe charge then was just US$ 5 (Naidoo [...]

[...] [...] proposed design ofthe Mughrabi ascent.

The decision also called “on the Director-General to organize a follow-up meeting of experts as soon as possible, once the parties concerned have reached an agreement” and “to continue applying the Reinforced Monitoring Mechanism for the state of conservation ofthe Mughrabi Ascent”.

In its previous reports, the Secretariat presented the action taken as follow-up to 176 EX/Special Plenary Meeting/Decision and to Decision 31 COM 7A.18 adopted by the World Heritage Committee at its 31st session (Christchurch, New Zealand, July 2007), by which it requested “the World Heritage Centre to facilitate the professional encounter at the technical level between Israeli, Jordanian and Waqf experts to discuss the detailed proposals for the proposed final design of theMughrabi ascent, prior to any final decision”.

Subsequently, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, [...][...]

[...] [...] horticulture inLibyan Arab Jamahiriya.

[...] [...] translationof Arabicworksinto European languages; acomparative study of school [...][...]

Particularly noteworthy are: (i) the meeting of United Nations system regional directors team for Latin America and the Caribbean with the executive management committee of CARICOM secretariat; (ii) the meeting of the United Nations system regional directors team for Latin America and the Caribbean with officials of the Government of Suriname on United Nations system coherence in the country; and (iii) the meeting of the regional directors group in LAC on HIV and AIDS.